Search Forums

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Re: Are ODN "atheists" theophobiacs?

Originally Posted by Rodriguez

Faith is required to believe, in spite of the evidence you have to the contrary, that the hat DOES contain a rabbit.

Not quite the same. The hat is a defined observable thing. God is said to dwell outside of time and space beyond the reach of any mortal man. We simply can't look "in the hat" and see if God is there or not. God has been defined such that there is no possibility for definitive disproof.

Substitute your rabbit for an invisible insubstantial ghost rabbit and we may have a comparison. There you either buy into the notion of invisible insubstantial ghost rabbits or you don't. There is no direct evidence regarding the rabbit to make a judgement on one way or another.

Re: Are ODN "atheists" theophobiacs?

Originally Posted by evensaul

No professional psychiatrist could make that determination without meeting the subject, yet you don't hesitate to make an instant and absolute diagnosis of a hypothetical subject. Amazing. Tell me how you can make that call so easily, and thereby completely exclude the possibility that he is repressing a belief in the boogeyman.

I don't completely exclude the possibility. I am arguing in generalities, which allows for possible exceptions.

And IN GENERAL, people are not afraid of things that they don't believe in.

So GENERALLY people who don't believe in the boogeyman are not afraid of the boogeyman and IN GENERAL atheists are not afraid of God.

Re: Are ODN "atheists" theophobiacs?

Originally Posted by mican333

I am arguing in generalities, which allows for possible exceptions.

Unsupported generalizations from someone with (I'm assuming) no psychiatric training. That doesn't do much to refute the proposition that some ODN atheists may be theophobic, and may have a repressed belief in God.

Last edited by evensaul; December 5th, 2011 at 06:42 PM.

"If we lose freedom here, there is no place to escape to. This is the last stand on Earth." - Ronald Reagan

Re: Are ODN "atheists" theophobiacs?

Originally Posted by Sigfried

God is said to dwell outside of time and space beyond the reach of any mortal man.

Then there is just as much reason to believe that a god exists as there is to believe that my aunt Martha has a billion dollars stored in a safe deposit box that exists outside of time and space beyond the reach of any IRS agent.

Can you name something whose existence is logically possible that cannot dwell outside of time and space beyond the reach of any mortal man?

It's not reasonable to say, "The reason you can't have evidence for the existence of X is because, er, um, . . . well . . . it's because X exists outside of time and space! Yeah, that's the ticket! X exists in a place in which no earthling can know anything about! . . . What's that? You want to know how I know that X exists in this place that I can't know anything about? Well, it's because, ah, um . . . well look, you're just going to have to trust me on this one, OK?"

Yeah, right.

You may as well ask someone to believe that God exists somewhere beyond the rainbow, at the end of a long yellow brick road.

Re: Are ODN "atheists" theophobiacs?

Originally Posted by Rodriguez

You may as well ask someone to believe that God exists somewhere beyond the rainbow, at the end of a long yellow brick road.

I mostly agree, but you have to admit that you still can't provide any solid evidence against it. That in no way means you should defaut to belief, but if you do believe, arguments to the contrary are not exactly founded on any kind of proof of absence as is the Rabbit who cannot be in the hat if you search the hat and don't find it.

Re: Are ODN "atheists" theophobiacs?

Unsupported generalities from someone with no psychiatric training. That doesn't do much to refute the proposition that some ODN atheists may be theophobic, and may have a repressed belief in God.

Attacking my argument based on my psychiatric training or lack thereof is an Ad Hom attack and therefore a logical fallacy. I will, rightfully, ignore it as such.

As far as the strength of my actual argument:

I forwarded a premise that is pretty much self evident - People are generally not afraid of things that they don't believe in. Then I apply the premise to atheists, as logic allows.

Do you disagree or challenge my premise? If not, then it is accepted as "true" for the sake of this debate.

Do you disagree or challenge my logic in applying it to atheists? If not, then my argument should be accepted as solid support for the position that atheists are not theophobic.

Or let me put it this way - my argument supports the position that ODN atheists are not theophobic much more strongly than you have supported the position that they are theophobic. As far as I can tell, your argument for them being theophobic is merely the suggestion that it's possible. Do you have an argument supporting the position that they actually are?

Re: Are ODN "atheists" theophobiacs?

Attacking my argument based on my psychiatric training or lack thereof is an Ad Hom attack and therefore a logical fallacy.

No, Mican. Pointing out that you lack credentials in psychiatry when you are offering a psychiatric opinion is not an adhom. It is a legitimate attack on the validity of your opinion.

Originally Posted by mican333

I will, rightfully, ignore it as such.

I'm crushed.

Originally Posted by mican333

As far as the strength of my actual argument:

I forwarded a premise that is pretty much self evident - People are generally not afraid of things that they don't believe in. Then I apply the premise to atheists, as logic allows.

Do you disagree or challenge my premise? If not, then it is accepted as "true" for the sake of this debate.

Do you disagree or challenge my logic in applying it to atheists? If not, then my argument should be accepted as solid support for the position that atheists are not theophobic.

You argue that they are not afraid because they do not believe. That does not refute the idea that there is a repressed belief.

Originally Posted by mican333

Or let me put it this way - my argument supports the position that ODN atheists are not theophobic much more strongly than you have supported the position that they are theophobic.

No, I don't think so.

Originally Posted by mican333

As far as I can tell, your argument for them being theophobic is merely the suggestion that it's possible. Do you have an argument supporting the position that they actually are?

I believe I outlined this in the op: Twenty ODN "atheists" have stated that they "KNOW" that there is no God. They are certain of it. This is an irrational position, and is not backed up by science or logic. Irrational and delusional thoughts are a sign of mental illness. Someone who is mentally ill may also repress memories or beliefs. Therefore, ODN "atheists" who claim that God absolutely does not exist may be repressing a belief in God, and may be theophobic.

"If we lose freedom here, there is no place to escape to. This is the last stand on Earth." - Ronald Reagan

Re: Are ODN "atheists" theophobiacs?

Originally Posted by evensaul

I believe I outlined this in the op: Twenty ODN "atheists" have stated that they "KNOW" that there is no God. They are certain of it. This is an irrational position, and is not backed up by science or logic. Irrational and delusional thoughts are a sign of mental illness. Someone who is mentally ill may also repress memories or beliefs. Therefore, ODN "atheists" who claim that God absolutely does not exist may be repressing a belief in God, and may be theophobic.

Re: Are ODN "atheists" theophobiacs?

Originally Posted by evensaul

Twenty ODN "atheists" have stated that they "KNOW" that there is no God. They are certain of it. This is an irrational position, and is not backed up by science or logic. Irrational and delusional thoughts are a sign of mental illness. Someone who is mentally ill may also repress memories or beliefs. Therefore, ODN "atheists" who claim that God absolutely does not exist may be repressing a belief in God, and may be theophobic.

Actually, with one or possibly two exceptions (that I've encountered and I have debated the atheists here), ODN atheists do not claim that that KNOW that there is no God. They usually argue that they believe that there is no God due to lack of evidence but are not entirely certain (which makes them soft atheists). And even the ones that claim that they know (the hard atheists) do attempt to make a scientific and/or logical argument that this is so (such as invoking paradox or violation of scientific law). Now, I don't think that any of them has succeeded in proving there is no God but I would put it down to flawed reasoning or not quite understanding the science correctly. But not being correct in one's scientific arguments does not make one irrational.

I wasn't declared insane or delusional when I didn't score well on a science test in High School or College.

Originally Posted by evensaul

Irrational and delusional thoughts are a sign of mental illness. Someone who is mentally ill may also repress memories or beliefs. Therefore, ODN "atheists" who claim that God absolutely does not exist may be repressing a belief in God, and may be theophobic.

No professional psychiatrist could make that determination without meeting the subject, yet you don't hesitate to make an instant and absolute diagnosis. Amazing. Tell me how you can make that call so easily.

Originally Posted by evensaul

You argue that they are not afraid because they do not believe. That does not refute the idea that there is a repressed belief.

The idea of repressed belief has not been supported (just suggested without support) so I refute the idea of repressed belief due to lack of support.

And again I ask - Do you reject or challenge the premise that people GENERALLY are not afraid of things that they do not believe in? YES or NO?

Re: Are ODN "atheists" theophobiacs?

If it's not very logical that the universe is self-creating, by your own admission.... how is it suddenly logical to have a self-creating thing inside of that universe?

No, it isn't, which is why there are no theists on ODN (of which I'm aware) declaring that God is self-creating. What is reasonable here (more intuitively reasonable than any other option) is that at the end of any causal chain there must be an ultimate cause that is itself uncaused; i.e., uncreated. Causal chains that never end are not reasonable, for they have no causal beginning, and causal chains without a first cause are not rationally attractive.

So while I'd agre the alternatives were poorly expressed, they remain that whether our universe is the only one created, or one of many produced by some other entity, that entity brings us up against the old "chicken/egg" "matter/mind" controversy.

If you interpret any arguments against your logic as "hatred"...... well, I'm sorry, but that's just being sensitive.

I don't believe that was the claim at all. However, that's not to say that's a claim that can't be supported by a valid argument that we'd never get to, because we could never get agreement on terminology. Would you feel better about "hostility" toward God; if the premise God has to exist for you to be hostile toward Him were dropped? There have already been a couple of atheists in this thread who have declared, implied, or manifested their hostility toward God.

Now, as a non-theophobe (I claim agnosticism and actually resent the atheist moniker, although it's technically correct), I do notice a lot of mud throwing and assumed correctness on both sides of the issue. I usually don't get into it with theists, simply because I know how strongly those beliefs can run an I am likely wasting breath making an argument. But I do frequently go after strong atheists when they exhibit logical inconsistencies. I hold them to a higher standard, and since they are relying on logic to support their positions, I will pounce on any deviations I may perceive.

Well, then, I would suggest you holding atheists to a higher standard could be a manifestation of something operating in you that is not just intellect, but includes an significant emotional element. Given the modern track record of atheism in the world, there's not a single good reason to conclude that atheism, and therefore atheists are any more honest, intelligent, wise, or observing of the world and humanity than are theists, so there is absolutely no intellectual reason to hold them to a higher standard of anything; certainly not clear thinking, personal integrity, or wisdom. In fact, one could probably argue you holding atheists to a higher standard smacks just a bit of personal insecurity on your part, along with a smattering of condescension toward theists.

I've also been branded a theist for doing this, as well as other names in conjunction with the word "hate".

What's left to say after that? You've just become the OP's exhibit #1, and such compelling evidence you should probably be ruled inadmissible for being too prejudicial.

But I don't have an irrational hatred of anybody (except, maybe, lefties ).

It can't be irrational if it's warranted, and some lefty somewhere is right now working furiously on providing you with the warrant you need to be rational.

Religion is a fundamental belief. I'm not surprised "toes get stepped on" so often. It's the mental equivalent of calling someone's kids dumb and ugly.

I'll go along with that if you can find a word or phrase to start the sentence that most atheists would see as including atheism. How about "Any belief concerning God..."?

Re: Are ODN "atheists" theophobiacs?

It is not an unreasonable interpretation of your words to take them to mean that you came to believe that atheism and theism both require faith to be believed.

Yes it is. You are having trouble reading an explicit statement, and taking away implications from it. Please note the word "my". I was not at any time attempting to say that other people's atheist faith definitely and specifically required faith. I was talking about the way I believed.

I have explained myself further as well when asked, and have noted that my point comes from few described atheists having a total lack of beliefs, as pure atheism would be.

Is there a right and wrong? Is there dark matter? Does something cause gravity? Do you believe in the big bang? Do you believe in abiogenesis? The list goes on and on, and if an "atheist" believes in something with less than total proof, then they are not in fact a true atheist - or at least they do believe in some things outside of proof itself. They have faith.

Atheism is a non-belief.

Agreed. However, such atheism is not seen in practice. In practice, (many) people have beliefs, and are not true atheists. This is my point - not that pure atheism requires beliefs, that would be anti-definitional.

It's similar to religious people, too. People say they're Christians, but believe lots things their Church told them which are wrong, or that their parents said which are wrong, or that they just prefer but are wrong - or they even dismiss things Christ said or did even though it's plainly evidenced. If they were true Christians, they would believe it just as it is, nothing else, and nothing less. But in practice a Christian (many) has things they believe in which are not Christianity itself.

You don't seem to know the definition of atheism. Perhaps you should look it up. In no definition of atheism of which I am aware does the definition include a positive belief in anything else. Atheism is about non-belief, not belief.

I k now what atheism is just fine thank you. I correct people on it often, and I was a hardcore atheist for 15 years - I know every argument out there on that topic. My point again is that atheism in theory and definition are not atheism in practice - and mostly that MY atheism was exposed to require faith. This is because, as most real-life atheists, I failed to actually hold no beliefs.

BTW, what do you mean by "popular science"? Are you attempting to draw a contrast between "popular science" and "real science"? If so, then please define the way in which you are using those terms?

Popular science is differentiated from real science by actuality. Pop science is what authorities say is true science, and Real science has nothing to do with who said it - it's just actuality, proven.

OK then, what specifically was it that you were "afraid of being wrong" about?

I was a very pronounced atheist, and I was adamant and opinionated on it. I was aggressive with those who challenged atheism, and explicit about it.

If I was wrong, it would have dealt a huge blow to my ego. That was what I was afraid of.

Since atheism is not an unwillingness to be subservient, you obviously were not trapped by atheism for this reason, but perhaps were "trapped" by your own psychological needs

I understand that, but most spiritualities have a significant component of being subservient to a being or power. I was staying an atheist because I didn't have to give up my freedom as an atheist, and to a degree a religious person must.

All in all, you simply have a very poor understanding of what atheism is.

Not true. However, you don't seem to understand religion or faith well - and you're also very good at misreading and misinterperiting my generally explicit statements.

No professional psychiatrist could make that determination without meeting the subject, yet you don't hesitate to make an instant and absolute diagnosis. Amazing. Tell me how you can make that call so easily.

Mican, you need to read and think about what I write more carefully. I made no firm diagnosis, but specifically and repeatedly use the word "may".

Originally Posted by mican333

And again I ask - Do you reject or challenge the premise that people GENERALLY are not afraid of things that they do not believe in? YES or NO?

No, not generally. However, the fact that people may be afraid of something due to repressed memories of an incident has been documented in the field of psychotherapy. Beliefs and memories have a lot of mixing and overlap, so the existence of repressed beliefs is a logical assumption. Consider the definition of a Freudian Slip:

Mican, you need to read and think about what I write more carefully. I made no firm diagnosis, but specifically and repeatedly use the word "may".

The position that people may be afraid of something due to repressed memories of an incident has been documented in the field of psychotherapy. Beliefs and memories have a lot of mixing and overlap, so the existence of repressed beliefs are a logical assumption. Consider the definition of a Freudian Slip:

Re: Are ODN "atheists" theophobiacs?

Originally Posted by Mdougie

People don't hate the concept of God they hate other people.

Care to explain what you mean by that?

I certainly don't hate people.
I also don't hate the "concept" of god.

There are specific acts of specific gods I take strong moral issue with and would say that these divine characters have moral failings. But that doesn't mean I hate them. It's rather silly to hate things you don't believe are real. (I suppose if you are really involved in a piece of fiction but that's a bit different that what we are talking about)

Now if I actually thought God destroyed the world or I was around while it was happening, you can bet I'd hate god. Its a tyrannical and arrogant thing to do. But since I consider such things pure fiction, I don't have any real animosity about it.

Re: Are ODN "atheists" theophobiacs?

Originally Posted by Sigfried

Care to explain what you mean by that?

I certainly don't hate people.
I also don't hate the "concept" of god.

There are specific acts of specific gods I take strong moral issue with and would say that these divine characters have moral failings. But that doesn't mean I hate them. It's rather silly to hate things you don't believe are real. (I suppose if you are really involved in a piece of fiction but that's a bit different that what we are talking about)

Now if I actually thought God destroyed the world or I was around while it was happening, you can bet I'd hate god. Its a tyrannical and arrogant thing to do. But since I consider such things pure fiction, I don't have any real animosity about it.

Well pretty much exactly. An atheist can't hate something they don't believe in. God is a concept. A purely imaginary one. Meaning there is no evidence for one in the physical world. One either has faith or one does not. So when an atheist expresses hate or contempt, It is for a person or the direct actions of a person. They are angry at, and hate other people, and the actions other people take.

Re: Are ODN "atheists" theophobiacs?

Originally Posted by Sigfried

Now if I actually thought God destroyed the world or I was around while it was happening, you can bet I'd hate god. Its a tyrannical and arrogant thing to do. But since I consider such things pure fiction, I don't have any real animosity about it.

I'm actually curious here, because I've heard this type of statement before and never really bothered to touch it.

So, if you DID see God enacting judgment on the world around you, you would take issue with that. Correct? But if that's the case, then we'd have to consider a few things: If God were doing this, it would be something He already said He would do (via the Bible), which means that He would be actually be keeping His word and being faithful to it. Which would also mean that He's hold people accountable for their thoughts, feelings, and actions.

So in essence, what you're really saying here is:

Even though God would have let us know there is a standard He holds mankind to...
Even though God warns that failure to meet that standard or rejection of it has a specific consequence...
Even though God is being faithful to His word and following through on EXACTLY what He said He would do...
You would take issue with that.

But what you're really taking issue with here is someone/something holding someone accountable for their thoughts, feelings, and behavior. That line of reasoning can be, and is, logically summed up as, "How dare you make us deal with the consequences of our behavior!" And you don't see a problem with that?

But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander.

Re: Are ODN "atheists" theophobiacs?

Originally Posted by Mr. Hyde

I'm actually curious here, because I've heard this type of statement before and never really bothered to touch it.

So, if you DID see God enacting judgment on the world around you, you would take issue with that. Correct? But if that's the case, then we'd have to consider a few things: If God were doing this, it would be something He already said He would do (via the Bible), which means that He would be actually be keeping His word and being faithful to it. Which would also mean that He's hold people accountable for their thoughts, feelings, and actions.

So in essence, what you're really saying here is:

Even though God would have let us know there is a standard He holds mankind to...
Even though God warns that failure to meet that standard or rejection of it has a specific consequence...
Even though God is being faithful to His word and following through on EXACTLY what He said He would do...
You would take issue with that.

But what you're really taking issue with here is someone/something holding someone accountable for their thoughts, feelings, and behavior. That line of reasoning can be, and is, logically summed up as, "How dare you make us deal with the consequences of our behavior!" And you don't see a problem with that?

Re: Are ODN "atheists" theophobiacs?

Really? So it's not the accountability you take issue with, it's the standard itself? Does it seem unreasonable?

But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander.